Bioethics 28 (7):335-342 (2014)
Authors | |
Abstract |
Jürgen Habermas has argued against prenatal genetic interventions used to influence traits on the grounds that only biogenetic contingency in the conception of children preserves the conditions that make the presumption of moral equality possible. This argument fails for a number of reasons. The contingency that Habermas points to as the condition of moral equality is an artifact of evolutionary contingency and not inviolable in itself. Moreover, as a precedent for genetic interventions, parents and society already affect children's traits, which is to say there is moral precedent for influencing the traits of descendants. A veil-of-ignorance methodology can also be used to justify prenatal interventions through its method of advance consent and its preservation of the contingency of human identities in a moral sense. In any case, the selection of children's traits does not undermine the prospects of authoring a life since their future remains just as contingent morally as if no trait had been selected. Ironically, the prospect of preserving human beings as they are – to counteract genetic drift – might even require interventions to preserve the ability to author a life in a moral sense. In light of these analyses, Habermas' concerns about prenatal genetic interventions cannot succeed as objections to their practice as a matter of principle; the merits of these interventions must be evaluated individually
|
Keywords | prenatal testing sex selection ethics eugenics genetic interventions |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
DOI | 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2012.02009.x |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Genetic Modifications for Personal Enhancement: A Defence.Timothy F. Murphy - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (4):242-245.
Genetic Modifications for Personal Enhancement: A Defense.Timothy F. Murphy - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics (4):2012-101026.
Genethics and Human Reproduction: Religious Perspectives in the Academic Bioethics Literature.Aasim I. Padela & Mariel Kalkach Aparicio - 2019 - The New Bioethics 25 (2):153-171.
Similar books and articles
Virtue Ethics and Prenatal Genetic Enhancement.Colin Farrelly - 2007 - Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 1 (1).
Genetic Engineering to Avoid Genetic Neglect: From Chance to Responsibility.Jessica Hammond - 2010 - Bioethics 24 (4):160-169.
Choosing Disabilities and Enhancements in Children: A Choice Too Far?Timothy F. Murphy - 2009 - Reproductie Biomedicine Online 2009 (18 sup. 1):43-49.
Parental Wisdom, Empirical Blindness, and Normative Evaluation of Prenatal Genetic Enhancement.R. Tonkens - 2011 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 36 (3):274-295.
Autonomy and Freedom of Choice in Prenatal Genetic Diagnosis.Elisabeth Hildt - 2002 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 5 (1):65-72.
Genetic Counseling and Termination of Pregnancy in Hungary.Zoltan Papp - 1989 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 14 (3):323-333.
Choosing Between Possible Lives: Law and Ethics of Prenatal and Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis.Rosamund Scott - 2007 - Hart.
The Genetic Difference Principle.Colin Farrelly - 2004 - American Journal of Bioethics 4 (2):21 – 28.
Insult to Injury: A Disability-Sensitive Response to Professor Smolensky's Call for Parental Tort Liability for Preimplantation Genetic Interventions.Alicia R. Ouellette - unknown
Prenatal Diagnosis for "Minor" Genetic Abnormalities is Ethical.Robert J. Boyle & Julian Savulescu - 2003 - American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):60-65.
The Ethics of Impossible and Possible Changes to Human Nature.Timothy F. Murphy - 2012 - Bioethics 26 (4):191-197.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2012-10-02
Total views
38 ( #296,485 of 2,498,263 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #212,099 of 2,498,263 )
2012-10-02
Total views
38 ( #296,485 of 2,498,263 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #212,099 of 2,498,263 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads